A close look at Rom 11 !

You cannot assume your position is right and then use it to prove it is right as that is circle reasoning and that is exactly what you are trying to do.

Just because both Gentile elect and Jewish elect share the same NEW BIRTH as illustrated in Isaac does not mean Gentile become Jewish or Israel or Jews become Gentiles. It only means that all promised seed regardless of Ethnic souce (Gentiles or Jews) are TWICE BORN. Being TWICE BORN does not change their ethnicity. Twice Born Jews are SPIRITUAL JEWS and twice born Gentiles are SPRITUAL GENTILES but neither in this present Gentile age are Spritiual Israel.

Spiritual Elect National Israel does not exist in this present age. Paul uses the FUTURE tenses when talking about when ISRAEL AS A NATION will be grafted back in again, will be received, will be brought to life.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT THIS REFERS TO REMNANT OF ISRAEL BECAUSE REMNANT IS PRESENTLY BEING SAVED IN EVERY GENERATION BUT ISRAEL AS A NATION OR SPIRITUAL ISRAEL WILL NOT BE SAVED UNTIL A SPECIFIC POINT IN THE FUTURE THAT IS DEFINED WITH DETAILED ACCURACY:

1. NOT "until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" - v. 25
2. NOT until after the Deliver comes out of Zion - v. 26
3. NOT until the ungodliness of Jacob is removed - v. 26
4. NOT until their sins are remitted - v. 27
5. ONLY THEN shall "all Israel" be saved - v. 26


The only spiritual Jews PRESENTLY existing from generation to generation is the "remnant" of Israel but that "part" which has been blinded - or NATIONAL ISRAEL AS A WHOLE will not be saved UNTIL after the events of Romans 11:25-28 which do not happen PRESENTLY but only at the END OF THE AGE with Christ's return from heaven.

All Galatians 3:29 proves is that both ethnic sources have the same basis to be the promised seed of Abraham - BIRTH BY DIVINE PROMISE AND POWER as in the illustration of Isaac! Galatians 3:29 does not make Gentiles to be Jews or Jews to be Gentiles.

You have not been able to give a RATIONAL or REASONABLE answer to the contextual time frame supplied by Paul in Romans 11. The salvation of "them" is always placed in the FUTURE tense while the remnant is always past or PRESENT tense (v. 5) and the FUTURE tense is used consistently up to the word "until" in verse 25! Verse 25 brings us to the END OF THIS AGE not during this present time but when CHRIST COMES THE SECOND TIME.

You have not been able to give a RATIONAL or REASONABLE response the TIME elements in Romans 11 and especially verses 25-28. Indeed you have ignored this evidence every time I have presented it.

 

BLINDNESS IN PART UNTIL FULLNESS GENTILES BE COME IN​

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

1. The blindneses is in "part"

2. This blindness continues in "part" UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles come in

3. The fullness of the gentils HAVE NOT YET COME IN so this blindness in part continues UNTIL then.

4. This cannot refer to the "remnant" as the "remnant" to do not continue in blindness but are PRESENTLY being saved in every generation (in Elijah's generation 7000 saved, in Paul's generation HE WAS SAVED and others being saved). The "remnant" is not that "part" of Israel that continues in blindness "until" the fullness of the Gentiles be "come in."


5. This refers to that PART of Israel which has been BLINDED in verse 7-9 - or National Israel as a whole or tghe PRIMARY part thus excluding the other part - the remnant part.

6. National Israel as a whole is that PART which has been cut off, dead, blinded, stumbled and is identified in all these verses as "them" and "they" and "their".

7. Every scripture in Romans 11 that speaks of "them" and "they" and "their" reconciliation, restoration, grafing in again, received use the FUTURE tense never the present tense as in the case of the remnant.

8. Romans 11:11-24 uses the FUTURE tense for this "PART" of Israel that will be saved, brought to life, reconciled and the FUTURE tense is used all the way to the words "UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" THEN "all Israel shall be saved" AFTER the deliverer comes out of Zion and AFTER the Deliverer turns the UNGODLINESS from Jacob and AFTER the deliverer removes their sins (vv. 26-27)

Since the fullness of the Gentiles HAS NOT COME IN YET then this "PART" is still in blindness.

Since the Delverer HAS NOT YET COME OUT OF ZION then this "PART" has not been delivered from its blindness or "saved"

Since the Deliver HAS NOT YET COME OUT OF ZION then Jacob has not yet been turned from his UNGODLINESS

Since Jacob has not yet been turned from his UNGODLINESSS then he has not yet been delivered from his sins (v. 27).

Therefore this BLINDED PART are "enemies of the gospel for your sakes" but when Christ comes again they will be saved according to "election" because they are "beloved" of the father's sake - v. 28

Case closed if you are HONEST with God's Word

 

You are the one lying and deceiving as this statement did not say what you charged me with saying! I NEVER SAID THAT SPIRITUAL ISRAEL INCLUDED THE NON-ELECT ISRAELITES but that is what you charged me with saying!

Spiritual Israel consists ONLY of TWICE born Jews and does not consist of any ONCE born Jews - that was my meaning and I made that clear!

Of course I have consistently denied that SPIRITUAL ISRAEL consists of Gentiles - that is no secret but that is not what you charged me with and YOU KNOW IT! You are playing the role of a deceiver and YOU KNOW IT!

My last two post exposes and condemns your error that spiritual Israel consists of Gentiles.

Both spiritual Jews and spiritual Gentiles share the same SECOND BIRTH illustrated by Isaac -Gal. 3:29 but they do not share the same ETHNIC designation "Israel" but they do belong to the same SPIRITUAL family of God and fellow citizens in the Kingdom of God and fellow members in the churches of God.

 

Absolute proof that SGB's interpretation is ERROR is that he will not deal with the bulk of the evidence I give in Posts 21-22. At the most, he will take little snippets here and there that do not affect the evidence whatsoever or he will simply IGNORE the evidence.

I challenge him here and now to take the evidence as a whole and peice by peice IF he believes his position is right! I predict he will dodge and run and ignore and make little snippet remarks to distract the readers.

LET SEE if I am right in my predictions!

 

Paul is simply taking something from the common practice of Israel to illustrate a specific point.

The first fruits were holy - that is they were set apart unto God as the first part of the harvest in obedience God and in order to obtain the promised blessing of God upon the "lump" or the greater part of what will be harvested in the future, as the first fruits, where the first part of the harvest. Setting apart (holy) the first fruits also set apart the final "lump" or bulk of the harvest yet to be reaped.

Both the firstfruits and the majority of the fruit being harvested proves that the root and branches were equally holy or else they would not have produced firstfruits and final harvest. Hence, the whole tree from root to final harvest is "holy" or set apart unto God.

This tree represents God's purpose of redemption that began with Israel as a nation. Israel as a nation was cut off temporarily as it will be grafted back in again (v. 23). In the mean time during this temporary cutting off the Gentile nations have been grafted in. During this period the firstfruits are the "remnant" of Israel and Gentile converts. When the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, then God will graft back again the Nation of Israel that had been temporarily cut off and then a final harvest will occur of the "bulk" of Israel.

The root refers to Abraham and God's covenant promise with Abraham of a promised seed consisting of Israel as a NATION and a promised seed taken from the NATIONS or Gentiles. The promised seed from the NATIONS are benefactors of Israel and the temporary cutting off of that "part" of the nation of Israel as a whole "bulk".

God has SET APART the root - covenant with Abraham
God has SET APART the branches - remnant of Israel, the Elect Nation of Israel and gentile elect.
God has SET APART the harvest now consisting of "firstfruit" - remnant of Israel and Gentile elect.
God has SET APART the final harvest or "lump" consisting of Elect Nation of Israel as a whole.

 

The Irrefutable Evidence of the Tenses in Romans 11​

There are three entities designated in Romans 11:

1. Remnant Israel
2. Israel that has been broken off
3. Gentiles

The salvation of the "remnant" of Israel is always spoken of in the PRESENT tense. The present tense is used for the remnant in the day of Elijah (vv. 2-3). The PRESENT TENSE is used for the "remnant" in Paul's day (v. 5). In contrast the PRESENT TENSE is used to describe the condition of Israel as a nation as "enemies of the gospel" (v. 28).

The salvation of the Gentiles is always spoken of in the PRESENT tense.

However, in regard to those identified by the pronouns "them" and "they" and "their" in regard to being broken off, cut off, rejected is always in the PAST tense while the receiving, grafting in again, restoration to life of "them" and "their" and "they" who have been broken off, cut off, is always referred to in the FUTURE tense and the only time the word "saved" is used for "Israel" is found in the future tense (v. 26). However, the PRESENT tense is only used of this group to define their PRESENT condition as "enemies of the gospel FOR YOUR SAKES" (v. 28). The PRESENT tense is never used for "them" and "they" and "their" who have been broken off, cut off, rejected to describe their salvation but the PRESENT tense is only used to describe them during the times of the Gentile grafting into the tree as "enemies of the gospel FOR YOUR SAKES" - v. 28

CONCLUSION: The tenses prove that the "remnant" of Israel is not "the Israel" that "shall be" saved AFTER the fullness of the Gentiles be come in - vv. 25-26. The tenses prove that the Gentile elect are not part of the Israel that "shall be saved" AFTER all the elect Gentiles be "come in" - vv. 25-26. The tenses prove that it is what HAS BEEN (past tense) cut off, broken off, rejected that "shall be" grafted in again, received, saved is "Israel" as a nation.

 

The Mental Gynastics Required by SBG​

9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

There can be no doubt that it is the NATION OF ISRAEL AS A WHOLE that has "stumbled" (v. 11) over the "stumblingblock" (v. 9). There can be no doubt that what has "stumbled" is exactly what Paul is denying have "stumbled that they should fall" as he says "GOD FORBID." However, SBG calls Paul a liar and claims the very ones who have stumbled - THE NATION OF ISRAEL - have stumbled without recovery.

Note verse 12 that Paul continues to speak of only that which has fallen "the fall of them" and then speaks of the "FULLNESS" of their recovery from that fall - not a "remnant" but the "FULLNESS" of that which fell - the Nation of Israel as a whole - its FULLNESS! or "ALL Israel shall be saved" - v. 28.




15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

SBG has to do extreme mental gynastics to make the first "them" mean "the nation of Israel" and the second "them" the remnant of Israel.

FIRST, if he admits that "remnant" Israel is included in the first "them" then he is taking the position that God can and does CAST AWAY the elect!

SECOND, he must take the position that something other than what was cast away is reconciled, received and brought back to life from the dead which makes absolute nonsense of Paul's whole argument that what stumbled and fell shall be received back in "FULLNESS" whereas SBG denies what has fallen will be received back in "FULLNESS" but only in "remnant".

THIRD, it is not only irrational but contrary to the Grammar of any language to claim that the same pronoun "them" used in the same verse means one thing in the first case and another thing in the second case when NTHER ANTECEDENT is supplied!!!

This is the kind of mental gynastics one must embrace to avoid the simple, clear and obvious meaning that the Nation of Israel as a WHOLE has stumbled, been broken off and yet in the future shall be restored, received from the dead to its "FULLNESS"!

 

No! It is your versus my interpretation of Romans 9:6-8 that is being debated. You can't assume your interpetation is correct and then use it as proof that your interpretation is correct! That is circular reasoning!!!! However, that is the kind of nonsense behind all your interpretations.

I knew you could not respond to any of my posts and I predicted you would not. You did exactly as I predicted and that is what you must do when your interpretation is WRONG!

 

Here is the absurdity of your style of arguing! You can't deal with the actual texts, their grammar, their words and so you go back to just asserting your position as though you did deal with it expecting everyone to ASSUME you did exegete the texts when in fact you did not and could not!

You don't care about evidence! You don't care about anything but one thing and that is to defend your heresies any possible way you can EXCEPT truthfully!

 

SBG's interpretations are false, his mode of interpretation is eisgetical and the absolute proof is that he has avoided posts 21-22! Why? Because those two posts expose his position as absolute falsehood!

I challenged him before to overturn evidence presented in those two posts and predicted he would ignore them and that is exactly what he continues to do!

 

How can the nation of Israel be broken off "the Israel of Promise"???? Does not that very statement require that prior to being broken off they were ONE together in the same tree?????? If not, then how can they be "broken off" if they were never part of the tree???

Second, Paul has already established that it is precisely what was broken off that will be reconciled, and received back or grafted in "again."

Are you going to say that "remnant" Israel was also broken off with the Nation of Israel as a whole???? They were also rejected by God and therefore they must be grafted back in "again"???

This is the utter nonsense of your intepretation! What you cannot show from this context is that the language used in Romans 10:7-12 is ever used of the "remnant".

That the Gentiles were grafted in is not disputed. That the "remnant" ALWAYS exists in every generation of the Nation of Israel is not disputed

However, your interpretation depends upon changing tenses, changing words, ignoring tenses, ignoring words used by Paul in this context. That sir, is called eisgesis not exegesis.

 

Still running! Can't deal with the information below can you! I will tell you what you are doing. You are doing what every cult and every heretic does. When they cannot deal with the OVERALL evidence of a passage they simply dissect one statement or verse at a time in isolation from the rest and then make it mean whatever their little depraved hearts want it to mean. That is the style of interpretation you are adopting here. When I get down to specific words and tense and relationships between verses in a context then you JUMP out of the context and resort to READING INTO this context a scripture you have chosen outside this context. That is your other cultic style of interpretation. Oh yes, and if these two fail you, you just duck your tail and run to the cathedral of total ignoring of the contextual factors and just proceed on your merry little way to the next text to do the same thing all over again. This is your mode of operation and it must be as this is the only mode of operation heretics can operate under and/or those who embrace HALF truths, as in your case.

Again, for the fifth time I present the evidence below - that you just keep on ignoring! Why? Because you have no contextual based answers.

 

Below is another post you just tuck your tail and run from:

 

So you are admitting that National Israel was included in the tree that your interpretation says represents those "in Christ" as in a previous post you defined the root to be Christ Jesus. Paul says they were branches in this tree and were broken off!!

SBG your interpretative scheme is a mess! When you attempt to interpret scripture to defend a HALF truth you can only defend it the way you have been doing it! You cannot deal with the posts that I continue to repost because your HALF truth simply will not stand up to the FULL TRUTH. Prove me wrong and respond to those posts that I have been reposting over and over again and from which you have been continually ignoring and running from.

You will continue to run and make little snippet remarks as you have done in the post I am answering. You ignored the objection I placed before you BECAUSE IT EXPOSED YOUR INTERPRETATION SCHEME FOR WHAT IT IS - error!